More than 100 of California’s most prominent chefs – including a slew from here in the Bay Area – are fighting a state law set to take effect July 1 that would ban foie gras, asking that lawmakers instead enact new, strict laws regulating its production.

Foie gras (French for “fat liver”) is the liver of a duck or goose that has been specially fattened to produce a rich, buttery delicate flavor prized by gourmets. But the traditional method of producing it involves force-feeding the bird with corn, though it can also be produced with more natural feeding methods. The Coalition for Humane and Ethical Farming Standards (CHEFS) has created a charter calling for laws requiring the latter rather than the total ban that’s about to take effect.

“We want to create a humane market, not a black market,” said Rob Black of the Golden Gate Restaurant Association, a member of the coalition. “Instead of a ban, chefs are urging lawmakers to pass new, strict regulations that will require humane and ethical production of foie gras and serve as an example to the rest of the world.”

“The ban would lead to the widespread production and sale of contraband foie gras,” he added. “Black-market foie gras would be dangerous to animal welfare, because smugglers and bootleggers willing to risk criminal prosecution are a far cry from farmers trained in humane and ethical production techniques.”

Former State Senator John Burton, now chairman of the California Democratic Party, authored the 2004 law implementing the ban, and isn’t thrilled with the chefs’ challenge. “I’d like to sit all 100 of them down and have duck and goose fat – better yet, dry oatmeal – shoved down their throats over and over and over again,” he told the San Francisco Chronicle.

The CHEFS charter calls for each farm to follow a set of specific humane protocols and submit to regular inspections by independently certified animal welfare experts to ensure compliance. Farmers would have to use industry optimum equipment to feed the ducks using methods that don’t harm the esophagus or beak, with periodic exams to confirm the procedures’ safety.

Farms would have to schedule regular visits by an animal health care professional to assess the general health and living conditions of the birds, and each bird would have to be inspected for good health by a USDA approved officer at the time of slaughter. Caretakers would have to be properly trained, adequately supervised and “gentle and calm in their gestures and movement.” Birds would have to be raised in an environment that helps build and maintain strength in their legs and overall good health, and would have to be hand-fed in a manner adapted to their age and size; each bird would be checked before feeding to evaluate its capacity so the amount of feed could be kept only to what’s necessary.

And birds would have to be kept in comfortable conditions to minimize stress and maximize comfort at each stage, with appropriate lighting, access to clean water, anti-pest measures, and suitable temperatures consistent with local weather conditions. Starting in 2017, birds would have to be “cage free” – not be housed or fed at any time in cages that restrict theirs ability to turn around freely, lie down, stand up, and fully extend their wings.

For a list of chefs who’ve signed onto this charter, follow after the jump:

I’ve put the greater Bay Area names in bold to make them easier to spot.

Re #1 – I assume that was a rhetorical question, RR, but for the record: Burton is 13 months younger than Stark.

Truthclubber

Yawn.

Cruelty is cruelty, no matter what kind of “skirt” you want to put on it (or yourself).

Just because we can (force feed “lesser” species to morph them into yummy morsels) doesn’t mean we should, any more than we should demand that able bodied 12 year olds should be allowed (er, forced if their economic circumstances allow) to work in factories (or as janitors, as Gingrich promoted) for 40+ hours per week.

With that, we see that 73 of the 103 (~71%) “whine-a-lots” are from this region, which represents maybe 1/3 of the population of California.

Oh, we ARE such liberals up here, compared to our brethen down in LA/SD, aren’t we?

DanvilleDemocrat

Folks should educate themselves about foie gras production before assuming it’s “torture” for the ducks to be “forced” to swallow the feed that fattens their livers — ducks possess no gag reflex, and eat food naturally this way. That it comes from a machine is really of no consequence.

Comments above notwithstanding, I like Senator Burton a lot — but he’s just not well-educated on this issue.

JohnW

The free market, consumer-driven approach to this would be to require transparency. How might that work? (a) require that menus include the English translation – “fat liver;” and (b) require that menus include a brief visual description of the methodology for producing the delicacy. Of course, if we took that approach to many dishes served in restaurants, many of us would just become vegans, which would help with the obesity problem!

Truthclubber

@6 — “ducks…eat food naturally this way…that…comes from a machine….”

Really? Coulda fooled me — every time I’ve observed ducks they want nothing to do with machines.

The industry has had 8 years to get ready for this ban on cruelty toward this species of waterfowl — deal with it.

I doubt that Western Civilization as we know it will come to a crashing halt on the morning of July 1st because of this…so move on.

We have ‘bigger’ problems to solve — like the ‘exploding’ obesity epidemic in this country and the Medicare bills that we will all have to ‘fork’ over our taxes to pay for…

If it was such a problem that it cost us all close to $600 per person, each year, you would think that the government would demand something be done about it!

Like, perhaps, insisting that people with a BMI over a certain number (say, 30 for obese, or 40 for “morbidly obese”, which BTW means “deathly fat”) pay much more for their health care, if they can get it at all!

But wait, they did, via ObamaCare!

The U.S. health care reform law of 2010 allows employers to charge obese workers 30 percent to 50 percent more for health insurance if they decline to participate in a qualified wellness program.